
Glass. 
Book. 






TEACHINGS 



OP THE 

/ 



9' 



IN'E'VT TEST^MEiSTT 



ON 



SLAVERY. 



BY JOSEPH P. THOMPSON, 

OF THE BROADWAY TABERNACLE CHURCH. 



> 



NEWYOPtK: 

PUBLISHED BY JOSEPH H. LADD, 22 BEEKMAN STREET. 

1856. 






I. 1m JtetXe. 



■^^"^ss / 



/ 



<i- 



2- L. %Xit\t. 



THE 



J^EW TESTAMENT CODE 



ON 



SLAVERY. 



Ephesians 6 : 5-10. 



"Seryants, be obedient to them that are your masters aooord- 
ing to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your 
heart, as unto Christ ; not with eye-service, as men-pleasers ; but 
as the servants of Christ, doing the will of Grod from the heart ; 
with good- will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men ; 
knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same 
shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. 

"And, ye masters, do the same things to them, forbearing 
threatening; knowing that your Master also is in heaven; 
neither is there respect of persons with Him." 

The epistle to the Ephesians contains the Christ- 
tian code for domestic life. The same for substance 
is repeated in the epistle to the Colossians. Hus- 
bands and wives, parents and children, masters and 
servants, are severally instructed in their personal 
and relative duties. To study these duties, to 
preach upon them, to practice them, is as much a 
part of the Gospel as to study, preach, and practice 
the primary duties of repentance and faith. The 
first sermon of Christ at Nazareth was not a dis- 



4 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

course on theology, but a plea for humanity, and a 
promise of blessings to Society, especially to its 
inferior classes, through his mission of grace. 

The law of Christianity in the relation of inaster 
and servant ; the nature of that relation^ and the 
reciprocal duties of master and servant under the 
Gospel ; are presented in the text as an essential 
point in the regimen of a Church of Christ, and in 
the apphcation of Christianity to human society. 

It has been arbitrarily assumed, that because the 
relation of master and servant is treated of in the 
same connection with the marriage relation and the 
parental relation, it rests upon the same natural and 
moral groimds with these fundamental relations of 
Imman life. Hence it is arojued that the abuses of 
Slavery are no more valid as an objection against 
the system of Slavery, than abuses of the marital 
and parental relations are valid against the insti- 
tution of marriage. Since all have to do in some 
form "sWth the relation of master and servant, and 
smce the institution of Slavery now demands the 
sanction and support of the Federal Government, 
and the suffrages of all citizens of the United States, 
it behooves us carefully to examine the Gospel code 
toucliing that relation. The question is not one of 
mere abstract morality, nor of poUtical economy or 
exj)e<lioiK*v, but a question of practical Christianity. 

WJiat does the JVew Testament teach conceiving 
tlie relation of master and servant f 

That the New Testament recosrnizes the existence 
of Slavery as a fact^ is plain from various allusions 



THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 5 

to that institution, especially in the letters of Paul, 
and from the instructions given to both masters and 
slaves. Does then Christianity acknowledge the 
propriety of that institution, or in any wise give to 
Slavery its sanction ? Does Slavery, as it existed in 
the Roman empire, find any warrant in the New 
Testament? Is it there recognized as a rightful 
institution, whose abuses only call for condemnation, 
in the same way that an abuse of power by the hus- 
band or the father is condemned without invalidat- 
ing the institution of marriage ? Is the essence of 
the relation of master and servant the same with 
that of husband and wife, and of parent and child ? 
— and are the abuses of that relation to be treated 
as only upon a level with abuses of the tenderest 
relations of hfe ? 

In answer to these questions I shall show, 

1. That in the Apostolic age^ Slavery existed 
Ijurely as a creature of the Roman law. 

2. That in defining the duties of the respective 
parties in that relation^ the Apostles nowhere acknow- 
ledge the rightfulness of Slavery under the law of 
God, 

3. That by placing the parties in that relatioyi 
under the higher law of Ghristian love and equality^ 
the Apostles decreed the virtual abolition of Slavery^ 
and did in time abolish it wherever Christianity 
gained the ascendency in society or in the state. 

These theses embody the code of the New Testa- 
ment, and the practice of the Apostles with respect 
to Slavery in the Roman empire. 



THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 



SLAVERY ITOT NORMAL NOR DIVINE. 

1. 1)1 the Apostolic age Slavery existed purely as 
a creature of the Roman law. It was not a normal 
condition of society, nor was it instituted by the 
conunand of God, or derived from his revealed 
Word ; but it was an institution of Roman society 
created by the civil law. 

The family institution exists everywhere as the 
normal condition of society. It grows out of the 
very nature of things ; the distinction of the sexes, 
^vith their correlative instincts and affections. Mar- 
riasre is a law of nature which lies at the foimdation 
of hmnan society. From this institution arises by 
the same law of nature, the relation of parents and 
cliildren. All this is normal. It belongs to the rule 
or principle of man's existence. It is that without 
which mankind could not exist. All the rudiments 
of society are in the family ; and the education and 
even the continuance of the race depends upon these 
fundamental relations of husband and wife, and 
parent and child. 

But will any one presume to assert this of the 
relation of master and slave ? Does this come into 
the same category with the relation of husband and 
Avife, as a normal condition of society, a part of the 
natural law under which Society itself exists? Then 
there has been no such thing as society in Xew- 
York since July 4th, 1827, when domestic Slavery 
was abolished by an act of the Legislature, passed 



SLAVERY XOT NOEMAL XOR DIVINE. 7 

ten years before. Then, in order to have a true 
normal condition of society here, we must reestablish 
Slavery. Then, in order to the constitution of so- 
ciety in Kansas, Slavery must be there estabhshed 
as its corner-stone. Then there is no true ci\dHza- 
tion in England, France, or Germany ; but Russia 
and Turkey are the only ci^dlized nations of Europe, 
these alone having the element of domestic Slavery. 

Will any sane man pretend that Slavery is a nor- 
mal state of society? — that the relation of master and 
slave belongs to a right and healthy constitution of 
society, just as the relations of husband and wife, 
and parent and child, are necessary to the existence 
of society ? Marriage was the origmal basis of so- 
ciety in Eden, and is its normal condition every- 
where ; the relation of parent and child is a natural 
consequence of this ; but the relation of master and 
slave is wholly artificial and arbitrary. It is set up 
by power and then constituted by law; but does 
not spring from nature. Even the code of Justinian 
declares that Slavery is "contrary to natural right," 
and that "all men by the law of nature are born 
m. freedom.'''' 

Moreover, as Slavery in the Apostolic age did not 
exist, as indeed it never can exist by natural law, so 
neither was it instituted by the command of God, or 
derived from his revealed Word. Marriage is not only 
an ordinance of nature, but was also a positive insti- 
tution of the Creator in Paradise. Slavery, we have 
seen, is not, in any case, an ordinance of nature. Is 
it, then, a positive institution of the Creator ? Did 



8 THE XEW TESTAMENT ON SLAYEKY. 

Jehovah ever ordain it, or give to it his sanction ? 
And if so, was Roman slavery derived from any 
previous ordinance or sanction of the divine law ? 

Domestic servitude existed in the patriarchal age, 
and under the Hebrew commonwealth. But it did 
not originate in a command of God, nor is there any 
evidence that God approved of it as an institution of 
society, but much evidence to the contrary. 

THE "CUKSE ON HAM." 

Men who either do not read the Bible at all, or 
who read it very carelessly, are prone to speak of 
the posterity of Ham as doomed by Jehovah to 
perpetual slavery. What endless changes have been 
rung upon the "accursed seed of Ham." But 
there is no such curse in the Bible, nor has any such 
curse ever been fulfilled upon the children of Ham, 
as such. Cash was the oldest son of Ham, and his 
son was Ximrod, the mightiest name of that dim 
antiquity, and the founder of that Assyrian empire 
which for ages ruled all western Asia, and which 
once and again carried terror into Palestine and 
Egypt. The growth of all this grandeur and power 
from cities founded by a grandson of Ham, and 
peopled by his descendants — a power that shook 
the earth, and whose memorials outlast the ages 
^surely does not verify the curse of perpetual bond- 
age said to have been pronounced upon the posterity 
of Ham. The fact is, that no such curse was ever 
pronounced. 



THE '""CITRSE OF HAM." 9 

Open the Bible at the 9tli chapter of Genesis^ 
and the 24th verse^ and you there read that " Noah 
awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger 
son had done to him; and he said, cursed be Canaan j 
a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren." 

Now Canaan was Ham's youngest son — as Ham 
himself was the youngest son of Noah — and the 
curse was pronounced upon Canaan by name, and is 
three times repeated. 'You, my youngest son, 
have put me to shame before your brethren ; you 
shall feel the punishment of this in the degradation 
of your youngest son ; he shall be put to shame 
before his brethren, and his posterity shall feel in 
their bones the curse of their dishonored ancestor.' 

Turning now to the 10th chapter of Genesis, (w. 
15-21,) we find the boundaries of Canaan's settlement 
accurately defined. It was the land afterwards so 
well known as the land of Palestine, reaching along 
the coast of the Mediterranean, from Sidon to Gaza, 
and eastward to Sodom and Gomorrah. None of 
the posterity of Canaan settled in Ethiopia. When, 
900 years after, the Israehtes, the descendants of 
Shem, conquered the land of Canaan, and made 
' hewers of wood and drawers of water of all who were 
not slain in battle, then was fulfilled that old pro- 
phetic denunciation : " Blessed be the Lord God of 
Shem, and Ganaan shall be his servant." The only 
curse ever pronounced upon any of the posterity of 
Ham was fulfilled in the subjugation of the Canaan- 
ites by the Israelites, about 1500 years before Christ. 
And this, like all slavery in the earliest times, was 
1* 



10 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

the enslavement of whites. The mstitution of slavery 
in the East was not based upon a distinction of color. 
K ever you hear a man, even though he be styled 
a Doctor of Divinity, justifying African slavery from 
the curse denounced upon Ham, do you advise him 
to go to the nearest Sabbath-school, till he can read 
and understand the Bible. 

SERVITUDE UNDER THE PATRIARCHS. 

As to the Patriarchs, the recorded fact that Abra- 
ham and Jacob had bond-servants is no more evi- 
dence that God approved of Slavery, than the record- 
ed fact that each of these patriarchs had two wives 
is proof that God approves of bigamy, or the record, 
twice made, and without censure, that Abraham 
equivocated about Sarah, is proof that the Bible 
sanctions lying. 

When we shall see a modern slaveholder arm his 
318 servants, and lead them hundreds of miles, over 
mountain, river, and desert, into a foreign and 
unsettled country, where no law or power can bind 
them to his service — when we shall see him thus 
heading his own trained and equipped household, 
for the rescue of an unfortunate kinsman, and divid- 
ing with them the spoils of war, we may begin 
to trace in that slaveholder some resemblance 
to the patriarch Abraham.* Or when we shall see 
some modern planter commissioning his chief serv- 
ant to go hundreds of miles beyond the icach of 

♦Gon. It : 13-17. 



SERVITUDE UNDER THE PATRIARCHS. 11 

plantation laws, equipped with dromedaries and 
laden with jewels and gold — ^having every facility 
for escape — yet trusted to choose a wife for his mas- 
ter's son, and to negotiate the marriage-contract,* 
then again we may discern the features of patri- 
archal slavery in the slavery of modern times. How 
palj^able it is that Abraham did not hold his servants 
as chattel-slaves. He was himself but a sojourner in 
the land of Canaan. IsTo local law would guard his 
rights as a master. 

But aside from the utter want of parallelism be- 
tween domestic servitude under the patriarchs and 
modern chattel-slavery, shall we make no account 
of the greater light enjoyed in our times? It has 
been aptly said, that " if Abraham were now living 
among us, he would be put into the penitentiary for 
bigamy."f Shall we go back to study morality in 
the twilight of the patriarchal age ? Those modern 
slaveholders who seek to cover themselves with the 
mantle of the patriarchs, remind one of the ignorant 
and superstitious peasantry of Italy, who, when 
their vines were blasted, offered a special prayer to 
the " most holy patriarch Noah," invoking his inter- 
cession, on the ground that he was the special patron 
of the vine, and familiar with its quaUties. If we 
are to copy the patriarchs in points where their 
example is not commended or enjoined in the 
Bible, then let us have the " patriarchal institutions" 
entire — ^inebriety, equivocation, deception, bigamy, 
polygamy, as well as slavery. Nay, nay. It is the 

Gen. 24. t Rev. L. Bncon, D.D. 



12 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

glory of the Bible that it is so great, so good, so 
true in itself, so instinct with the sense of justice 
and of right, that it can afford to record, A\uthout 
comment, the failings of the best of men, and leave 
us to judge these by its own infillible standard. 

THE MOSAIC CODE. 

The laws of Moses did not introduce Slavery 
among the Jews. The story of Joseph is evidence 
that Slavery then existed throughout Arabia and 
Egypt. In making laws for a semi-barbarous and 
intractable people, Moses suffered many things be- 
cause of the hardness of their hearts. A careful 
study of his code demonstrates that "the Mosaic 
statutes respecting the relation of master and slave 
are obviously modifications and amendments of a 
previously-existing common-law, and are designed 
to meUorate the condition ot the slave, to protect 
him from oppression, and to promote the gradual 
disuse and abolition of slavery."* 

By that law, kidnapping, or the stealing of men to 
make them slaves, which was the origin of all the 
Slavery in this country, was a capital crime. " He 
that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found 
in liis hand, he shall sin'ehj be put to death.'''' 

By that law a fugitive slave was not to be re- 
turned to liis master. By that law a slave maimed 
by his master, a femnlo slave violated by her mas- 
ter, wore ontitlecl to frccclom, and the master was 

♦Slftvory, hy 1- Uno ,n. p 20. .}f! •hnfh's vol. 1, p. 9. 



THE MOSAIC CODE. 13 

lield responsible for any act of severity to a slave. 
By that law slaves were to have the same religious 
privileges with their masters. By that law the Hebrew 
slave was set free every seventh year, and there was 
an emancipation of all poor and oppressed Israelites 
every fiftieth year. The ranks of slaves were 
recruited from thieves, debtors, and captives in 
war ; but the slave was always treated as a 'person ; 
the laws were altogether in his favor ; and perpetual^ 
unmitigated Ghattelism^ was a thing unknown 
amo7ig the Hebrews. 

The enslaving of the heathen was permitted to 
the Israelites under certain regulations. By the 
law of nations in the earliest times, they had a right 
to enslave or to kill aU captives taken in war. The 
laws of Moses modified and humanized this bloody 
common-law. And if the Israehtes were allowed to 
hold bondmen from among the heathen with some- 
what more of rigor than they could hold a Hebrew 
servant, this, like the conquest and subjugation of 
Canaan, was part of the special judgment decreed 
by Jehovah agamst idolaters, and inflicted through 
Israel as his chosen people. We laugh at the 
absurdity of those who would find in the command 
given to Joshua to exterminate the Canaanites, a 
divine warrant for the Puritans and their descend- 
ants to exterminate the aborigines from this conti- 
nent. But is that any greater absurdity than the 
logic which finds, m a special and restricted permis- 
sion given to the Hebrews to hold heathen bond- 
servants, a perpetual divine warrant for chattel- 
slavery ? 



14 THE NEW TESTA ?,fENT ON SLAVERY. 

LATER JEWISH LEGISLATION. 

The regulations of the Mosaic Code had their 
natural and designed effect. They made the care 
of slaves so much a burden to the master, they 
made the rights of slaves so prominent and so valid, 
that even the mild and modified form of Slavery 
tolerated by the Mosaic law, gradually died away. 
The fact that Solomon levied upon the remnant of 
the Canaanites for bond-service in building the 
Temple, shows that even his roll of " servants born 
in his house," could not have been great.* There 
is no evidence that the Hebrews in Palestine, ever 
engaged in the foreign slave-trade. The Prophets 
denounced the abuses of Slavery, and urged the 
aboUtion of the system.f 

The traditionary Jewish laws upon this subject, 
codified by the pious and learned Maimonides, are 
instructive, as showing the increasing leniency of 
the system in the latter times of the Hebrew com- 
monwealth4 This code required that an adult slave, 
purchased by a Hebrew from an idolater, should be 
circumcised ; but this must be done with the free 
consent of the slave himself; otherwise he must be 
returned to his heathen master. If voluntarily cir- 
cumcised, he was entitled to the privileges of a prose- 
lyte in the house of Israel. The code required that 
the master should be kind to his slave, and not let 

* 1 Kings 9: 20,21. 

t See Isaiah 1 : 17 : " Reli<'re [or righteit] the oppres,ied ,•" .^8 : C, " IM ih^ 
oppressed go f tee; hrenk er'Ti/ yoke;"' also Jer. 84, etc. 
X Bpc Apprriftix A. 



SLAVERY IN THE TIME OF CHRIST. 15 

his yoke weigh too heavy on him. "He must find 
him in sufficient meat and drink, and must not abuse 
him either by word or deed, nor rebuke him with 
rage ;^ but must speak to him mildly, and must give 
him time to ofier his defense in case of culpability." 
How manifest is it that the slave was a person 
owmg service, and not a mere piece of property. 
The law favored manumission or emancipation upon 
the soil, m a variety of ways. A converted slave, 
that is, a circumcised Gentile, could claim his free- 
dom of the magistrates if his master sold him to an 
idolater, or to a proselyte of the gate ; or could 
assert his freedom by running away. Such a slave 
residmg in Judea, recovered his freedom if his 
master sold him to any person whatever out of the 
land of Judea— even to a Jew m the adjacent parts 
of Syria. He could not be taken out of the land of 
Judea by his master without his free consent. Tlie 
converted slave of a Hebrew residing in a foreign 
country, who escaped into Judea, must not be given 
up to his owner. Thus we see that the traditionary 
laws of the Hebrews, carrymg out the spirit of the 
Mosaic code, tended to amehorate the condition of 
bondmen, and finaUy to aboUsh all invbluntary ser- 
vitude, except for crime.* 

SLAVERY IW THE TIME OF CHRIST. 

It is a fact worthy of notice m this connection, 
that the four Gospels contam scarce one allusion to 
Slavery as yet m existence among the Hebrews. 

* See furfher in Appendvf A. 



16 THE I^W TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

In some of Hs parables our Lord draws his iUustra- 
tions from sei-vants, using the term dovXog, (doidos,) 
which in the Greek classics ordinarily denotes a 
slave. But in Kew Testament usage that term of it- 
self proves nothing as to the nature of the service ; 
and some of these very iUustrations seem to forbid 
the idea of a 5o;iC?-servant.* Only three cases are 
mentioned m the Gospels of persons having servants 
who may be supposed to have been slaves ; and but 
one of these is at aU positive ; namely, the Roman 
centurion, who held his servants by Roman law. The 
term dovXog is apphed to the servants of the Caper- 
naum nobleman, and the servant of the high-priest 
whose ear Peter cut off; but beyond this mdeter- 
minate word nothing is intimated of the condition 

of either. 

Some have inferred from the silence of the Gos- 
pels upon the subject, that Slavery among the He- 
brews had entirely ceased before the time of Christ • 
This is not quite correct ; for an mcident m the hte 
of Ga?naUel, the famous Rabbi of that day, shows 
that he had bond-servants; and sundry aUusions m 

* In Matthew 18 : 23-35, we read of a servant {doulos) who owed his lord 
ten thoxmtnd talents, and was forgiven the debt. This servant {doulos) 
then seized upon a fellow-servant, idoulos,) and cast him into pr.son, or a 
debt of a hundred pence. The term douZos is used throughout, but the 
transaction hardly comports with the idea of &c;irf-service. 

So in the parable of the talents, (LuKe 19 : 12-26,) the term <^"^^^^ 
throughout, but the confidential relations of the servants to the.r lord - 
trust ropos;d in them, the reward given to the '>^''^^^^^''.:;"l'^''^. 
negligent servant-theso several details do not comport w.th bo.ul-.en .c, 
certainly not with modern Slavery. 

t See la Barn^H, Kitto, M'J ^-V, n.iQn.\ and others. 



SLAVERY IN THE TIME OF CHEIST. 17 

the Mislina and in Josephus, show that Slavery 
did exist to a limited extent among the Jews in 
Palestine till their expulsion under Hadrian. But 
it is certain that in the tune of Christ very few slaves 
were held in Judea by Hebrew masters. The Jews 
as a people were subjugated and impoverished ; He- 
brews were no longer made slaves, except as a pun- 
ishment for theft ; and only the wealthy families, who 
in that agricultural country were comparatively few, 
could afford to purchase slaves of the Gentiles. Our 
Lord and his disciples seldom came in contact with 
such families, and as his mission was distinctively to 
the house of Israel, the few proselyted bond-serv- 
ants living in comparative freedom and ease in the 
houses of the great, would hardly come under his 
special notice. At the great marriage-feast in Cana, 
where all were Jews, there were no slaves, but only 
waiters^ {dcaKovot.) In the family of Lazarus, where 
Jesus was intimate, Martha did the house-work. 

The Savior made his teachings specific only with 
reference to evils that came unmediately under his 
eye, while he laid down principles that apply tc 
every form of evil. To sum up all, then, on this 
point. Slavery existed among the Hebrews in Judea, 
in the time of Christ, much as it exists in New-Jer- 
sey at this day. We learn from the census that 
there yet remain in that State 236 slaves ; but one 
is hardly ever reminded that Slavery exists in New- 
Jersey. As to the Romans in Judea, Christ seldom 
addressed specific instructions to them upon any 
point whatever ; but labored among his own nation. 



18 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

He is silent with res2:»ect to gladiatorial shows, 
to idolatrous rites, and the barbarities of war. 
Will any one infer that he approved of these? 
We may, therefore, dismiss Hebrew servitude and its 
code as having virtually passed away at the date of 
the New Testament. It had so much declined in 
Palestine, was so far inoperative, that it had ceased 
to be consj)icuous as an element in the social state 
of the Jews. 

ROMAN SLAVERY. 

That with which we have to do m the New Tes- 
tament — that system with which the Apostles came 
in contact, when they went forth from Judea to 
preach the Gospel throughout the known world — 
was Boman Slavery^ which existed neither by nat- 
ural law, nor by any divine appointment or sanction 
whatever, not even as derived from the books of 
Moses, — ^for the Romans did not go to these for their 
institutions — but was purely a creature of the 
Roman law. 

What, then, was the origin of this Slavery, and 
what were its essential features ? Roman Slavery 
was the fruit of military conquest. As the Romans 
extended their territory, they found it necessary, in 
order to retain their conquests, to reduce to slavery 
the ca-ptives taken in war. The very term serous, a 
slave, is said by the code of Justinian to be derived 
from the f ict that captives were preserved alive and 
Bold, instead of being put lo dealli. The conquered 



ROMAN SLAVERY. 19 

were considered as booty ; and persons, as well as 
cattle and things, were distributed among the con- 
querors, or were sold for the benefit of the state. 
Hence, slaves came to be treated as cattle or ch^t- 
iQls — capitaUa, goods movable or immovable, 
such as flocks, herds, and other possessions ;— a thing 
unknown in Hebrew law. After the final defeat of 
the Samnites by the Romans, 36,000 prisoners of 
war were sold as slaves.* In the first Punic war, 
20,000 prisoners were taken and sold. The victory 
over the Cimbri yielded 60,000 captives. The Gal- 
lic wars of Ctesar are said to have furnished 400,000 
{)risoners for slaves. These were of various nations. 
Slavery was not then based upon distmction of 
color as marking an original inferiority of race, 
according to the doctrme of recent times ; it did 
not claim a divine sanction in the curse on Ham — 
the Romans knew nothing of Noah or his posterity; 
it was based solely upon power— the power of law- 
less violence to subdue numerical or physical weak- 
ness. 

The taste for idle luxury engendered by the sud- 
den acquisition of large and fertile territories, and 
the creation of a servile class to cultivate without 
wages the immense estates of the wealthy citizens 
of Rome, encouraged also the foreign slave-trade as 
a branch of commerce. Not only was the interior 
of Africa ravaged to supply the market of Rome, 

* MebuTir (Hist. vol. iii.) distrusts Livy's figures, and even decimates 
them; but he considers the number of slaves in CapiM to have been very 
large. 



20 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

but Asia Minor, Sardinia, Spain, and Britain, yielded 
cargoes of slaves to build the public works of the 
capital, to serve her wealthy citizens, and to gratify 
the brutal passions of the mob by fighting with 
Avild beasts in the arena. The island of Delos was 
the great centre of this traffic ; sometimes 10,000 
slaves were transhipped there in one day. 

Roman slavery made no distinction between the 
descendants of Ham, and those of Shem and 
Japhet. It rested upon conquest. Slave mer- 
chants always accompanied the Roman armies. So 
many slaves were brought from Asia Minor as the 
spoils of war, that ^'•Phrygian'''' became as common 
a name for slave as "African" is in our day. 
When Caesar invaded Britain, the taunt that the 
conquest was worthless was met by pointing to the 
slaves brought from that island — " Not a scruple of 
silver ; but many slaves." Roman slavery made our 
ancestors its prey ; though Cicero thought the 
Britons so inferior to the Asiatics, that they were 
not worth buying. I doubt not that in the monu- 
ments of ancient Rome that we now visit with curi- 
ous eyes, in the ruins of temples, of aqueducts and 
basilica, and in the paved ways and arches of vic- 
tory, are courses of brick and stone that were laid 
by the sweat and toil of our ancestors, during the 
four hundred years when British slaves were mer- 
chantable goods upon the Tiber. 

The growth of this system in the Roman republic 
is admirably portrayed by Bancroft, in his essay on 
"-Tlie Dcdlne of the Iloman People:' The in- 



KOMAN SLAVERY. 21 

stitution of Slavery, and the monopoly of land and 
labor, gradually deprived the country of that mid- 
dling class between the extremes of wealth and pov- 
erty, which are the real strength of a nation. The 
Romans went to war, leaving slaves to till the 
fields. " Instead of little farms studding the country 
with their pleasant aspect, and nursing an independ- 
ent race, nearly all the lands of Italy were engrossed 
by large proprietors, and the plow was in the 
hands of the slave."* All trades were acquired by 
them, and they were hired out by their masters for 
gam. 

Tiberius Gracchus^ a pure-minded patriot, sought 
to remedy this evil by an Agrarian law. This much 
abused law was simply a Homestead Bill. " It was 
designed to create in Italy a yeomanry : instead of 
slaves, to substitute free laborers ; to plant liberty 
firmly in the land ; to perpetuate the Roman Com- 
monwealth, by identifying its prmciples with the 
culture of the soil."t The wise law of Gracchus 
had met the approval of the people, and was to be 
decided by the Senate. This body was made up of 
patrician slaveholders ; yet some reasonable com- 
promise was hoped for, even from them. But 
Slavery, true to its instincts of violence, took up the 
bludgeon when argument failed. The reformer 
Gracchus, who had dared to assail the system, was 
beaten to death with clubs by its " gallant" defend- 
ers, upon the steps of the capitol, and his corpse 
was dragged through the streets and thrown into 

* Bancroft Miscellanies, p. 2S0. t Bancroft, p. 236. 



22 THE NEW TESTAilEXT ON SLAYEEY. 

the Tiber. Modern cliivalry has not even the poor 
merit of originality. 

Such was the bloody triumph of Slavery in Rome. 
All the evils that Gracchus had predicted ei;isued. 
The bone and sinew of the nation perished in foreign 
wars, and Rome counted only aristocratic idlers, 
free paupers, and innumerable slaves. The lands 
were impoverished; work and trade were consid- 
ered ignoble ; and nearly all the business of society 
— ^its commerce, its trades, its arts, its amusements — 
all were conducted by slaves for the profit of their 
masters. Thus free labor was rooted out by a ruinous 
competition. Then followed servile wars ; and thus 
the way was paved for that despotism which ren- 
ders the names of Tiberius and Nero forever execra- 
ble. Slavery sucked the life-blood of the Roman 
Republic. Let not the history of her fate be the 
prophecy of ours. 

Since Roman Slavery originated in force, its radi- 
cal idea was the right of the strong to oppress and 
degrade the weak. Hence, from the outset, it dif- 
fered from Slavery among the HebrcAvs in this — that 
while the Hebrew law of ser^dtude regarded the 
slave as a person under limited obligations to his 
master, the Roman regarded liim as a thhir/, a chat- 
tel, entirely at his master's disposal. Let this distinc- 
tion be carefully noted. It is the radical distinction 
between the Slavery which had obtained among the 
Hebrews, but had almost ceased to be in the time 
of Christ, and the Roman Slavery which every- 
where met tlie eye of tlie Apostles in tlicir mission- 



ROMAN SLAVERY. 2L3 

ary tours. Cicero and other Roman publicists of 
the first authority, m their definition of the term 
se7'vi, inckide horses and mules as well as slaves ; 
and by the Roman law slaves were taxed in the 
property of the master, along with houses, lands, 
beasts, and bronze money. 

Liddell, one of the most careful writers upon 
Roman history, thus describes the condition of the 
Roman slaves : " They had no civil rights ; they 
could not contract legal marriage; they had no 
power over their children ; they could hold no pro- 
perty in their own name ; their very savings were 
not their own, but held by consent of their masters ; 
all law-proceedings ran in the name of the master. 
For crimes committed they were tried by the pub- 
lic courts, and the masters were held liable for the 
damage done, but only to the extent of the slave's 
value. To kill, maim, or maltreat a slave, was con- 
sidered as damage to his master, and could only be 
treated as such. No pain or sufi*ering inflicted on 
a slave was punishable, imless loss had thereby 
accrued to the owner."* Says Bancroft : " In the 
eye of the law, a slave was nobody. No protection 
was afforded his limb or his life, against the avarice 
or rage of his master ; the female had no defense 
for her virtue and her honor ; the ties of affection 
and blood were disregarded."! 

This is Chattelism ; these are laws not for persons^ 
but for chattels ; not for men^ but for things. We 
have seen that the Hebrew law cared for the slave 

*Vol. 1.454. t Mis. p. 302. 



24 THE XEW TESTAifEXT ON SLAVERY. 

— protected his person, gave him redress against 
injuries inflicted by the master, and especially guard- 
ed the sanctity of marriage and of female virtue. The 
Roman law reversed all this. There was no legal 
marriage among slaves ; the children of the mother 
were born to her condition ; a slave could not testily 
in court ; if a master was slain in his house, by an 
unknown hand, all his slaves were put to death with- 
out trial. Tacitus narrates an instance in which 
four hundred slaves were put to death, on the sus- 
picion that one of them had murdered his master. 

One could hardly beheve the cruelties said to ha-^ e 
been inflicted upon slaves, had not Roman Slavery 
survived to our time, to witness against itself. The 
whip was always at hand* If a slave spoke or 
coughed without permission, he was flogged. If a 
maid committed the least blunder in the toilet of 
her mistress, her back must feel the thong or the 
heated iron. Scourges loaded vnth lead, or furnish- 
ed with prongs, the yoke, the brand, the pincers, 
the rack, were common modes of torture. There 
were torturers by profession, to whom masters 
sometimes sent theu' slaves for the refinements of 
cruelty. Cato, the moralist of Rome, was accustom- 
ed to exercise himself, after suj^per, by flogging sucli 
of his slaves as had not waited properly upon tlie 
table. Worn-out slaves were turned out to die. 
Sometimes a slave was crucified or burnt aUve, at 
the caprice of his master.* 

* Rib. llc'pos. vol. 6, ArL Roman Slavery, p. 422. Ali^o Blair ; and 3fick- 
eliCn "■Human liepublic.'^ 



DID CHRIST SANCTION SLAVERY ? 25 

Such was Roman Slavery, and tliis is the Slavery 

which, IN ITS ESSENTIAL FEATURE OE CHATTELISM, aiicl 

with many of its horrid incidents, has been transmit- 
ted to our times, and exists upon our soil.* There 
was, however, one rehef in the ancient system, which 
is wanting in its modern representative. In the ear- 
Her history of Rome the manumission of slaves upon 
the soil was frequent. Masters were accustomed to 
reward favorite slaves with their freedom, and these 
freedmen had civil rights ; some of them even 
became eminent as poets, artisans, and statesmen. 
Even the barbarism of Rome did not make expatri- 
ation a condition of emancipation. About the year 
of Rome 430, personal slavery for debt was abolish- 
ed, by law.f 

Such was Slavery as it existed in the time of 
Christ and his Apostles ; a creature of the Roman 
law, the offspring of force, and sustamed by cruelty 
and terror. 



DID CHRIST AND THE APOSTLES SANCTION 
SLAVERY ? 

II. The question now arises, did Christ and the 
Apostles sanction this system ? I might well leave 
it to your moral sense to answer that question. 
The Bible disciplines our moral sense to the intent 
that we may judge of right and wrong -without the 
aid of specific precepts. Apply that moral sense to 

* For proof, see Appendix C. 
+ Arnold, Hist. p. 816, Am. Ed. 
2 



26 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAYEEY. 

the case before us. You see what was Roman 
Slavery. Do you believe — can you believe — dare 
you so much as harbor the thought that Christ and 
his Apostles ever could have sanctioned such a sys- 
tem? You know better. Every man who has a 
conscience knows better. 

Yet it is argued that they did sanction this Sla- 
very, because they are silent as to the system and 
its evils, and because they gave instructions to those 
who were in the relation of master and slave, as 
constituted by the Roman law. 

These arguments were urged ujDon the floor of the 
General Assembly, (N"ew School,) at its session in 
New-York, in May, 1856. 

Said a Southern divine, and a ISTorthern one 
echoed it : "I aflirm that slavery is one of the social 
relations of men. It is Uke husband and wife, pa- 
rent and child, older and younger, teacher and scho- 
lar, magistrate and citizen, merchant and clerk, cap- 
tain and soldier, sovereign and people. These rela- 
tions of life are expressly ordained of God ; or they 
exist m that social economy which is the result of 
Divme Providence. In all these there is service. This 
service is found to be either voluntary or involun- 
tary, and, as to duration, brief or protracted. There 
is either restraint or liberty in them all. In them 
:i]l there is a liability to oppression. The common 
talk of oppression in the relation of master and slave 
is just as applicable to all these social relations."* 

* Speech of Rev. Dr. Ross. The fallacy of Dr. Uos3 lies in the assump- 
lion that the relation of master and scrvunt can exist only un:lcr a i-ystcm 



DID CHEIST SANCTION SLAVERY? 27 

" Such was the language uttered by ministers of 
Christ in that Assembly. Is it true ? Is this the 
Gospel of the grace of God ? 

In reply to this argument, I take the position that 
in defining the duties of master and servant, the 
New Testament nowhere adm,lts the rightfulness of 
Honiari slavery under the law of God. 

With respect to the alleged silence of Christ and 
his Apostles upon Slavery and its evils, I remark first 
that they were not wholly silent on that subject, 
and, secondly, that their silence gives no sanction to 
the system. 

We have already seen that Christ hardly came m 
contact with the institution of Slavery — for it was 
no longer prominent among the Jews to whom his 
mission was mostly confined. He laid down general 
principles; but commented only on specific evils 
that existed around him. And yet Christ laid the 
axe at the root of Slavery, as at the root of Despot- 
ism, in his first sermon at ISTazareth, when he said : 
" I am come to preach giad tidings to the poor ; to 
preach deliverance to the captives ; to set at liberty 
them that are bound ; to proclaim a jubilee from 

God." 

Christ bore mtness against Slavery, when he de- 
nounced all pride and ambition, covetousness and op- 
pression of the poor. Christ reasserted the unity 
of the race ; the equahty of all men before God ; 
He reenactedthe law of Smai, "Thou shalt love thy 

of Slmery. Whereas, the dependence of labor upon capital makes that a 
natural relation ererj-where. His illustration proves nothing for Slavery 



^ 



28 THE NEW TESTAMEXT OX SLAVEHY. 

neighbor as thyself;" and expounded this by the pre- 
cept, " WTiatsoever ye would that men should do to 
you^ do ye even so to them.'''' Who ever heard of 
an advocate of Slavery so in love with the system, 
that he would have others do to him as he does to 
the helpless slave ? 

Was James silent when he said : " Go to, ye rich 
men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall 
come upon you. Behold the hire of the laborers 
who have reaped down your fields, which is of you 
kept back by fraud, crieth / and the cries of them 
which have reaped, are entered into the ears of the 
Lord of Sabaoth." Are these cries of the oppressed 
that pierce the heavens and reach the ear of God — 
silence f Was Paul silent when he said : " The 
law is made for murderers, for adulterers, for men- 
stealers^ for liars, for perjurers, and if there be any 
other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 
according to the glorious Gospel of the blessed 
God" ? 

But he was silent, it is said, as to the abolition of 
Slavery. " He did not denounce it as an evil or a 
sin." Did he therefore sanction the system ? The 
argument proves too much. If silence as to Slavery 
argues an approval of the system, then silence as to 
its enormities argues an approval of these as a part 
of the system ; and silence as to other organic laws 
and evils in the Roman empire argues that tliese 
also were sanctioned, or at least allowed. Here, 
then, let us consult facts in other relations. 



THE DOMESTIC CODE OF ROME. 29 

THE DOMESTIC CODE OF ROME. 

In the Roman empire arbitrary power was not 
vested only in the holder of slaves. Every Roman 
father possessed that power equally with the master.* 
When a child was born, it was left to the father to 
decide whether it should live or die. The infant was 
placed upon the ground. If the father took it up, he 
signified his intention to rear it ; if he let it lie, it was 
exposed in the street or by the river to perish, or to 
be taken up by some stranger, who might then 
claim it as his slave. If the father claimed the child, 
his power over him was as absolute as that of the 
master over the slave ; and it continued through life 
unless the son was formally emancipated, and made 
a citizen. The earnino-s of the son could be claimed 
by the father ; who had also the right to scourge his 
son, to sell him mto slavery, to imprison him, to 
banish him, to put him to death. 

This was the relation of father and son by Roman 
aw. Gibbon thus describes it : " In the forum, the 
senate, or the camp, the adult son of a Roman citi- 
zen enjoyed the public and private rights of a per- 
son ; in his father's house he was a mere thing ; 
confounded by the laws with the movables, the cat- 
tle and the slaves, whom the capricious master 
might alienate or destroy, without being responsible 
to any earthly tribunal. At the call of indigence 

* This illustration was first suggested to me by the admirable essays of 
Rev. W. Hague, D.D., on Christianity and Slavery. I believe that this use 
of it is original with him. 



30 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAYERT. 

or of avarice, the master of a family could dispose 
of his children or his slaves. According to his dis- 
cretion, a father might chastise the real or imaginary 
faults of his children by stripes, by imprisonment, 
by exile, by sending them to the country to work in 
chains among the meanest of his servants. The 
majesty of a parent was armed with the power of 
life and death; and the example of such bloody 
executions, which were sometimes praised and never 
punished, may be traced in the annals of Rome be- 
yond the times of Pompey and Augustus.* 

Nor was this all. The husband had much the 
same power over the wife, which the master had 
over the slave, and the father had over the son. In 
law the wife was nothing. The husband, if he fan- 
cied himself injured, could inflict corporeal punish- 
ment upon his wife, and if she was guilty of wine- 
drinking or infidelity, with certain formalities he 
could put her to death. Indeed, the authority of 
the husband over the wife in pagan Rome was quite 
up to the notions of some modern divines as to a 
husband's rights.f 

Such was the family despotism which existed in 
the Roman Empire in the time of Christ and his 
apostles. And yet the New Testament is entirely 
silent with respect to this bloody code of domestic 
law. Nowhere in that book can you find a com- 
mand, " Husbands do not whip or kill your wives ;'' 
nowhere can you find a command, " Fathers, do not 

♦Decline ami Full, vol. ill., p. 163. 

t See speeches In General Assembly (N. S.> for K-'fl. 



THE DOMESTIC CODE OF ROME. 31 

scourge your sons, nor sell or torture them, nor send 
them into exile, nor put them to death." Nowhere 
do you find a protest against this domestic tyranny 
of law and custom as contrary to the Gospel of 
Christ. Nowhere do you even find an allusion to 
it as an evil to be done away. What then ? Did 
Paul sanction that horrible tyranny of the husband 
and. the father? Does his silence respecting the 
Roman law of domestic life show that he either ap- 
proved or tolerated that law ? Is that your logic ? 

Remember that this tyranny of the husband over 
the wife, and of the father over the son, was just as 
much estaUisJied hy law^ as was the power of the 
master over the slave. If therefore the silence of 
the Apostle as to slavery and its evils is an evidence 
that he sanctioned Roman Slavery, then his silence 
as to this household despotism is evidence that he 
sanctioned, that. We are told, that "there were 
60,000,000 slaves in the Roman empire, and yet Paul 
says nothing against slavery." So were there mil- 
lions of wives and sons in that empire, livmg under 
domestic tyranny, and yet he says nothmg of 
their oppressions. And yet there was never a 
more flagrant violation of the law of God than 
the Roman law of the family. The defense of 
Roman Slavery from the alleged silence of the New 
Testament concerning it, proves too much, and falls 
to the ground. 

In the time of Paul the brutal sports of the arena 
were common in the Roman empire. Trained gla- 
diators, or captives and crimmals, were set to fight 



32 THE XEW TESTA:MENT on slat PIE v. 

wild beasts or to fight one another in the aniplii- 
theater, for the amusement of tlie multitude. Paul 
was perfectly flimiliar with these gladiatorial shows ; 
indeed, some suppose that he himself was once com- 
pelled to light with beasts at Ephesus. He some- 
times draws his illustrations of the Christian warfare 
from these contests of the gladiators. Yet he is 
silent as to the barbarous tendencies of such sports. 
Did he therefore sanctio7i them ? Is that your loo-ic ? 



NO KIG-HT OF SUFFRAGE IN ROME, 

Slavery in the Roman Empire existed by virtue 
of the civil law. But in the tune of the Empire^ the 
people had no voice in making the laws, and could 
do nothing whatever to change or abolish them. 
This rested solely with the Emperor. And in the 
time of Paul, freedmen had come to be regarded by 
slaveholders as a nuisance, and restraints were im- 
])osed upon masters who might wish to emancipate 
their slaves. In the reign of Xero surely, the peo})le 
had no sovereignty, no elective franchise, no legis- 
lative power. They were restrained in their personal 
liberties, so that there was almost nothing which 
tlip^ii could do legally for the removal of slavery. In 
such circumstances silence does not imply assent. 
f>esides, the ei)istles of the New Testament were not 
tracts published to act upon soc'ety at large, but 
manuscript letters sent to little comjianies of per- 
sons to instruct them in their duties. Flonce weave 



mSTRUCTIONS TO SERVANTS. 83 

not to look to them for a general discussion of public 

This consideration has great significance. We 
are apt to conceive of the Kew Testament m primi- 
live times, as beuig before the public much as it is m 
our day ; forgettmg not only that it was not then a 
printed book, but also that it was not even ^ booJc 
reduced to form by the final arrangement of the 
sacred Canon. The Apostles wrote letters to local 
assemblies of believers, which were composed gen- 
erally of poor and imiiifluential persons, and these 
letters were first read m these assembhes, and then 
copies were multiphed by hand. Keepmgm view 
the persons whom they addressed and their object 
in writing, we cease to wonder at their omission ol 
many topics relating to society at large, 

INSTKUCTIONS TO SERVANTS. 

But it is said that the Apostles give instructions to 
parties in the relation of master and slave, and 
thereby give an implied sanction to Slavery itself. 
Precisely the opposite of this is true. Whatever in- 
structions they give to parties implicated m the 
svstem, they nowhere admit the rightfuhiess of 
Slavery under the law of God, but often imply the 

contrary. «, , ^ a 

In prescribing the relative duties of husbands and 

mves, and of parents and children, the New Testa- 
ment distinctly sets forth the divine authority ot 
marria-e and the parental relation. In giving in- 



84 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

structions to rulers and subjects, the New Testa- 
ment teaches the divme authority of civil govern- 
ment, though it does not give a divine right to parti- 
cular rulers or to particular forms of government. 

But in Qfivins: instructions to masters and servants 
the New Testament does not speak of Slavery as 
existing by the appointment or authority of God ; 
you can not find m these instructions one word in 
vindication of Slavery, or one word in approval of 
the relation of master and slave as a desirable rela- 
tion for either party. They are simply told how to 
conduct themselves in a relation established by laws 
above thek control. This omission is significant. 

Let us see now, how far these apostolic precepts 
look toward an approval of Slavery. " Art thou 
called, being a servant ?" Does the grace of God 
come to you in the lowly condition of a bondman ? 
" Care not for that." Do not fret and chafe that you, 
who are called to be a son of God and an heir of hea- 
ven, called to sit with Christ and to judge angels, are 
here held m bondage by a fellow-man ; abide patient- 
ly in your lot. " But if thou mayest be free" — if 
you have the opportunity to gain your freedom — 
" USE IT RATHER." Does that look like a sanc- 
tion of Slavery ? 

Paul had no such opinion of the happy lot of a 
slave as to advise him to continue thankfully in tluit 
condition, if he could change it. Peter says: "Ser- 
vants, be subject to your masters with all fear, (that 
is, the fear of God;) not only to the good and gentle, 
but also to the frowiird. For this is tliaukwortliy, 



INSTRUCTIONS TO SERVANT'S. 35 

if a man for conscience sake toward God, endure 
grief, suffering lorongfidhj- Does that look like 
. an approval of the system? Then did the Apostle 
approve of the conduct of Pilate and the Jews 
towards Christ, whom he holds up to those abused 
slaves as an example of patience in suifermg. His 
aro-ument to the servant is not based at all upon the 
lawfulness or desirableness of his lot, but upon the 
example of Christ. " Because Christ also suffered 
for us, leavmg us an example, that ye follow m his 

steps." 

There is a tone of compassion in all the instruc- 
tions of the Apostles to servants, which is far from 
indicating an approval of Slavery. They did not 
meet in ecclesiastical assemblies to argue the advan- 
tao-es of a state of servitude ; how good a thmg it 
is Uiat such poor, ignorant creatures have masters 
to care for them; how superior their lot is to that 
of the freedmen around them ; no, when the Apostles 
speak of servants, there is a tone of humanity 
toward such as are in bonds ; they address them as 
in a condition hard to be borne; but smce the 
providence of God-mark, not the moral preference 
but the providential will of God, which suffers so 
much evil m the world-since this suffers them 
to be in that condition, they should be meek, and 
patient, and Mthful, " that by well doing they ma> 
put to silence the scandal of foolish men" about th. 
licentiousness of the Gospel. They were not to he 
or steal, or be idle, because they felt themselves 
^o be oppressed ; they were to obey even hard mas- 



36 THE XEU' TESTAMENT OX SLAVERY, 

tors, not because the law of God had set these mas- 
ters over them, not because God had mstituted 
Slav^ery and put them m bondage as the best possi- 
ble condition for them and their children ; not be- 
cause God approved of that condition ; but because 
as Christians they were bound, in whatsoever state 
they were, to honor Christ and his cause. If a 
Christian was a prisoner, he must honor Christ as 
Paul did in his bonds ; and if he were a slave, he 
must do the same. John Bunyan must not lie or 
kill his keej^er because he is cast into Bedford jail ; 
he must be a well-behaved prisoner. Was his im- 
prisonment therefore just ? 

Did Christ indorse the administration of Herod 
and Pilate by pajdng tribute money ? Did Paul 
indorse the bloody reign of Nero, by exhorting 
Christians to be peaceable, law-abiding citizens? Xo 
more does he indorse Roman Slavery by the in- 
structions he gives to servants. On the contrary 
he condemns that system in the very tone of these 
instructions : " Servants, be obedient to them that 
are your masters according to the flesh." Why ? 
Because they have bought you and have a right to 
your services ? Because they have reared you and 
taken care of you? Because the law requires this 
of you? Because you have no rights as men ? Bo- 
I'ause God has set up Slavery for your good ? No, 
l)Ut ",as the servants of Christ, doing the Avill of God 
fi'om tlie ]wAvt ; witli good will doing service to tlu' 
Lord — AND NOT TO MEN." Tlicv urc to cunoble tlir 
lowlv condition in wliioli they mo placed, with tin- 



INSTRUCTIONS TO MASTERS. 31 

dignity of the Cliristian doing in all things the will 
of God. Where is Slavery approved, where is the 
Koman Ir.w of Slavery admitted to be right by the 
law of God in any counsel or instruction given to 
those in that relation ? Nay, the foundation of that 
whole system, which was CHATTELISM, is knock- 
ed away by every precept that addresses the slave 
as a MAN", bought with the blood of Christ and ac- 
countable to God. The servant is brought under 
moral responsibility, which a chattel can not feel. 

INSTRUCTIONS TO MASTERS. 

III. But there are instructions to masters as well as 
to slaves, and these lead me to my last position ; name- 
ly. That hy ignoring the Roman law of Slavery^ and 
placing both master and servant under the higher 
law of Christian love and equality^ the Apostles de- 
creed the virtual abolition of Slavery^ and did in 
time subdue it^ wherever Christianity gained the 
ascendency in society or in the state. 

Christianity was a kingdom within a kmgdom. 
Penetrating through all forms of government and of 
society, it gave its law directly to the soul ; and 
then, working from the mdividual outward, it lea- 
vened and renovated society and its institutions. It 
did not work by social revolution as a means to an 
end, but produced social revolution as a necessary 
consequence of its transformation of the individual. 
But it is a great fallacy to suppose that because the 
result to be effected bv Christianity was G:radp..ii 



38 THE NEW TESTAMENT OX SLAVERY. 

and remote, therefore the ^9ri;ic^}?^e tending to that 
result was left to a gradual development. The piin- 
ciple which should regulate society, and Avhich in 
time would reform society in the mass, was laid down 
at the outset as the supreme law for the indlmdual. 
Because the process of social transformation 
must needs be slow, the necessity for that transfor- 
mation, and the principles by which it must be 
effected, were not left to be gradually discovered in 
the future. No mdividual was suffered to hide liim- 
self under the shadow of society ; to plead that an 
evil or abuse with which he was implicated was a 
social evil that time must cure, and to take advan- 
tage of the delay in reforming society, to indulge a 
little longer Ms own complicity with the wrong. 
No ; the law that was to permeate and revolutionize 
society was given as a law to the individual believer, 
the moment he entered the kingdom of God. He 
could not cross the threshold of that kingdom mitil 
he bowed his will to the supremacy of that law. 

THE LAW OF CHRIST. 

The Apostles have nothing to say specifically 
against the abuse of wives by their husbands, or of 
children by their ])arents ; they do not legislate 
against specific evils of slavery, or against the sys- 
tem as a whole ; — Why? Because they and their 
Master have given to every Christian a law whicli 
renders all such acts incompatible with fellowship 
in the kina'<loTn of Ood. Paul <1<m's jiot nssail 



I 



THE LAW OP rilPvIST. OQ 

the Roman code ; he does not blindly butt agaihst 
what he could not move ; but he gives to Chriltia.is 
a law that hfts them out of the pale of that code in 
all theii- intercourse with one another. They must 
still Hve under Roman law, and make the best of it ; 
but that is not to be their standard or their shield! 
''I>are any of you, haviiig a matter against an~ 
other, to go to law before the unjust, and not before 
the saints .?" How could a Christian take advan- 
tage of the Roman law to enslave another, or to 
exact of him unrequited labor ? The rights of mas- 
ter and servant must be adjusted, not before the 
heathen, but before the saints; not by the Roman 
slave-code, but by the law of Christ. And what wa^ 
that law ? " ONE is your Master, even Christ, and 
ALL YE ARE BRETHREN." "A new com- 
mandment I give to you, that ye love another ; even 
as I have loved you, that ye also love one anotherP 
Christians were a pecuHar people. They formed 
a spiritual society apart from the world— fellow-citi- 
zens of the commonwealth of Israel. In this relation 
they ceased to be under the Roman law as their 
source of right or rule of action. Hence the relation 
of master and servant was at once lifted out of the 
plane of the civil law into the higher plane of 
Christian love. The outward relation constituted 
by law might not cease, it might not be possible 
legally to terminate this, but the essence of Slavery 
was abohshed by the fundamental law of Christianity. 

See how the Gospel transforms this Roman chattel 
into aChristinn man : ''Masters, render fo your sen^- 



40 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVERY. 

a7its that which is just and equal.'''' Treat them as 
your equals in all the essential rights of men — as hus- 
bands, as fathers, as laborers worthy of their hire, as 
rational and immortal souls, give to them EQUAL- 
ITY.* These words are the death-blow of Roman 
chattel-slavery. They are good where slavery does 
not exist — for every relation of master and servant ; 
but they abolish slavery at a stroke. And these 
words are enforced by a solemn reference to the 
judgment — " knowing that both your and their Mas- 
ter is in heaven ; neither is there respect of persons 
icith Him.^'' And then, on the other hand, the ser- 
vant made free by the Gospel is not to plume him- 
self on that, nor to set liimself upon his dignity ; 
but to be voluntarily humble and faithful in his posi- 

* Rev. Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, whose learning and orthodoxy none will 
dispute, and whom none will accuse of "abolitionism," thus comments on 
this passage in his recent work on Ephcsians. 

'■'■Give to your seroanU that which is just and equal. That is, act 
towards them on the principles of justice and equality. Justice requires that 
all their rights as men, as husbands, and as parents, should be regarded. 
And these rights are not to be determined by the civil law, but by the law of 
God. ' As the laws,' says Calvin, 'gave great license to masters, many as- 
e«umed that every thing was lawful which the civil statute allowed ; and such 
was their severity that the Koman emperors were obliged to restrain their 
tyranny. But although no edicts of princes interposed in behalf of the s]av»\ 
God concedes nothing to the master beyond what the law of love allows.' 
Paul requires for slaves not only what is strictly just, but '//v igott/tc. 
What is that? Literally, it is equality. This is not only its signification, 
but its meaning. Slaves are to he treated by thuir masters on the princi- 
ples of equality. Not that they are to be equal with their masters in author- 
ity or station, or circumstances; but they are to be treated as haying, is 
men. as hunbands, and as pirent*, equal rights with their mvstf.i';*. 
It is just as great a sin to deprive a slave of the just recompense for his liilmr. 
or to keep him in ignorance, or to take him from his wife or child, as it is to 
act thus towards a free man. This is the equality which the law of Cuxl 
tlomand-'. nm] i>n fhi.s principle the final judgment !« to t.o ndininistcrcl." 



THE LAW OF CHRIST. 41 

tion, not quitting a master because that master is 
declared to be his equal. " They that have believ- 
ing masters, let them not despise them because they 
are brethren."* How could a chattel despise its 
owner ? How would that caution sound in the ears 
of modern slaveholders? What Southern church 
would tolerate such an exhortation to its slaves ? 

Hear now the decree of the Apostle Paul for the 
abolition of Slavery: "As many of you as have 
been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. You 
are all alike covered with Christ's rifrhteousness and 
radiant with his glory. Each and every one of you 
is Christ. And now shall the Christ here oppress 
and injui'e the Christ there ? Shall one soul, made 
bright with the glory of Christ, soil and trample 
under foot that glory in another ? Nay, ye have 
each and all, put ofl* self and put on Christ ; — there is 
neither Jew nor Greek — there are no favorites in this 
spiritual commonwealth ; there is neither bond nor 



*In 1 Tim. 6 : 1, 2, Paul makes a distinction between two cla5ses of serv- 
ants. First, those still " under the yoke,''' that is, having heathen masters, an> 
to be submissive and obedient, from a regard to the honor of God. Secondly, 
those having "beMeving masters" are not to despite those itiasters, becausf 
Christianity has taken away their legal preeminence, and reduced them to h 
common brutkerho jd with their servants. Does not this argue the virtn-il 
emancipation of every slave whose master became a Christian ? 

The case of Onesimus is in point. He wished to return to his once legal 
master, whom probably he had defrauded when he ran away. Paul certi- 
fies his conversion, assumes his debts, and exhorts Philemon to receive 
liim, '■'■not now as a servant, but abuvse a servant, a brother beloved.'''' F.>i- 
Philemon to have done otherwise would have been contrary to the Gospel. 
Paul might have retained Onesimus, and would have done so had he not fi-li 
that Philemon could be trusted to treat him as a brother. Onesimus, if lio 
ever was a slave, did not return as such. 



42 THE NEW TESTAMENT OX SLAVERY. 

free — no distinctions of caste are here allowed ; there 
is neither male nor female — no tyranny of the 
stronger sex over the weaker, no special j^rivileges 
whatever in this kingdom ; for ye are all OXE in 
Christ Jesus." Truly has it been said that " this 
law of Christ was the law of laws. Its authority 
was imperial. Its decision was ultimate. Where 
the law of the empire was at variance with the law 
of Christ, who can doubt to which Christians wouhl 
yield the supremacy ?"* 

RESULTS AND DUTIES. 

The principle of equaUty which the Xew Testa- 
ment lays down for the government of its discij^les, 
wrought out the abolition of Slavery first in the 
Church, and by the Church throughout the Roman 
Empire. According to Neander : " Christian mas- 
ters looked upon their servants no longer as slaves ; 
but as their beloved brethren. They prayed and 
sang in company ; they could sit at each other's 
side at the feast of brotherly love, and receive to- 
gether the body of our Lord." Church-laws were 
made in favor of slaves. Even the sacred vessels 
of the Church were sold for their redemption ; and 
in the reign, of Constantine the emancipation of slaves 
was performed as a religious act in the churches 
and on the Sabbat li. Guizot testifies that " the spirit 
and genius of Christianity abolished slavery through- 

* Ilagxte. Christianity and Statesmanship; to which I would again refer 
tlic rea;ler for a niasiterly treatment of this wliole subject. 



RESULTS AXD DUTIES. 43 

out the world," and even Gibbon admits the facts, 
though he withholds from Christianity its meed of 
praise. The law of Christ is a law of emancipation. 

What, then, is the application of this law to our 
circumstances and times ? The system of Slavery 
which exists in this country is the Roman system of 
chatteHsm. It does not descend from the patri- 
archs or the Israelites. It originated in lawless vio- 
lence ; it is upheld by force and terror.* This system 
is as incompatible with Christianity as was the 
Slavery that existed in Apostolic times. It is radi- 
cally hostile to the Gospel of Christ. AYliat then is 
the duty of Christians toward it ? Those who live 
where the system exists, are bound to free themselves 
and their churches from all connection with the sys- 
tem of cJiattelism and forced service. They may not 
be able at once to do away with the law of Slavery 
in the State ; but they should practically abolish in 
the Church the distinction of bond and free, and 
give to the slave his equal rights as a man. Till 
Christians at the South do this, are they not resjion- 
sible for the sin of the system of Slavery ? 

We ask this in all Christian candor and charity ; 
and we ask them to do no more than Christians at 
the North have done. When Newport, R. I., was 
a center of Slavery and the slave-trade, and the 
wealth of its citizens came mainly from that source, 
the church of Dr. Samuel Hopkins passed this re- 
solve : " That the slave-trade and the slavery of 
the Africans as it has taken place among us, is a 

* Appendix C. 



44 TUE NEW TESTxiMEXT ON SLAVERY. 

o-ross violation of the riorhteousness and benevolence 
which are so much inculcated, in the Gospel ; and 
therefore we will not tolerate it in this church." 
And the church, in face of society, carried out that 
resolution in its disciplme. When Southern churches 
practically come up to that standard, Slavery will 
speedily cease.* 

But WE also have a duty in this matter. Ex- 
cept so far as by political or ecclesiastical action 
we have sanctioned it, we are not indeed respon- 
sible for Slavery, where it is; we can not inter- 
meddle with it by positive legislation; we must 
have large charity for those who are in it ; we must 
not judge them by our hght. We must speak to 
them always in Christian love. 

But whatever allowance we make for those who 
are involved in the system by law, custom, or inher- 
itance, we can make none for those who would carry 
it to curse a soil now free ; and we can make no ex- 

* Dr. Hopkins of Newport, being much engaged in urging the sinfulness 
of Slavery, called one day at the house of Dr. Bellamy in Bethlem, Connec- 
ticut, and while there pressed upon him the duty of liberating his only 
slave. Dr. B., who was an acute and ingenious reasoner, defended 
elaveholding by a variety of arguments, to which Dr. H. as ably re- 
plied. At length Dr. Hopkins proposed to Dr. Bellamy practical obedience 
to the golden rule. " Will you give your slave his freedom if he desires it?" 
Dr. B. replied that the slave was faithful, judicious, trusted with every 
thing, and would not accept freedom if oflfercd. " Will you free him if /c 
desires it?" repeated Dr. H. "Yes," answered Dr. Bellamy, "I will.'' 
" Call him then." The man appeared. " Have you a good, kind master? ' 
asked' Dr. Hopkins. " Oh ! yes, very, very good." " And are you happy ? ' 
» Yes, Master, Tenj happy." " Would you be more happy, if you were 
free ?" His face brightened ; "Oh ! yes, Master, a great deal more happy." 
"F/-om this moment:' said Dr. Bellamy, "you are freer Go thou and do 
likewise. (Sec " Life of Bellamy," Congregational Board.) 



RESULTS AND DUTIES. 45 

ouse for ourselves if we do not our utmost to hinder 
that. ' Excuse ! Suppose you were asked to join in 
a foray to capture slaves in Africa, could you find 
an excuse for that ? Suppose a party who had done 
this should ask you to participate in the spoils, and 
to give your influence to keep in Slavery those whom 
they had seized? Could you find an excuse for 
that ? Never could you excuse yourself if you did 
not repudiate and oppose the outrage. Just such 
an outrage you, as a citizen of the United States, 
are asked to sanction. Can you excuse yourself if 
you do not your utmost to hinder it ? 

No question of practical Christianity is so impera- 
tive upon us to-day as this. Christianity and Slavery 
can not live together. They have now met face to 
face upon a virgin soil. We know that in the end 
Christianity must triumph. We know that Slavery 
must go down ; but this nation, like Rome, may first 
o-o down in the struggle. The prayers and efforts of 
Christians alone can avert a catastrophe which the 
madness of rulers is hastening on. You can not 
make this a question of party measures or of political 
expediency. It is a question of vital, practical 
Christianity between your soul and God. If you 
thrust it aside, it will haunt you in night-dreams ; 
and it will face you in " That Day." The day shall 
come when all party platforms, measures, and reso- 
lutions shall be burnt with fire, and all human work 
and institutions shall be dissolved. Then shall you 
stand face to face with the slave before Him who 
is no respecter of persons. The question then will 



46 THE NEW TESTAMENT ON SLAVEET. 

be : " What did you to secure for this man the 
blessino-s of freedom and of the Gospel ? When the 
destiny of miUions trembled on the shp of paper you 
cast into the ballot-box, how did you decide that 
destiny ?" Beware lest the sentence come : " Inas- 
much as ye did it 7iot to the least of these my breth- 
ren, ye did it 7iot to me. Depart from me, ye 
workers of iniquity.'''^ 



APPENDIX A. . 47 



APPENDIX A. 

For the gratification of the curious reader I here subjoin an 
extract from the IlUkoth Aabadim, or " Slave Code," of the Rab- 
binical Law. For this, as well as for valuable suggestions 
touching the laws of servitude among the Hebrews, I am in- 
debted to the courtesey of the learned and estimable Dr. N. Y. 
Baphall of New- York, whose reputation as a scholar is common 
to both hemispheres. 

The Mishna, as is well known, embodies in a written form the 
old traditions of the Rabbins touching the laws of Moses. It is 
a digest of such Jewish traditions as were of general authority 
in the second century of the Christian era, when these were 
reduced to writing by Rabbi Judah, surnamed the Holy. 

The schools of Babylon and Jerusalem severally appended to 
the Mishna their own commentaries. These are known as the 
two Gemaras. The Mishna, with the Babylonian Gemara or 
notes, forms the Babylonian Talmud. The same Mishna, with 
the Jerusalem Gemara or comments, forms the Jerusalem Tal- 
mud. That of Babylon, as the more ancient and complete, has 
the greater authority. In the twelfth century the learned 
Maimonides made a digest of the laws of the Talmud. His work 
codifies both the Mishna and the Gemara, both the text of tra- 
dition and the commentaries thereon, and is a standard work 
among the Jews. The date of the traditions themselves is not 
to be° confounded with the date of their cojnpilation in the 
Mishna. 

Thus much premised concerning the authority of these tradi- 
tionary laws among the Jews, I now give a fair specimen of the 
laws of slavery in detail. It must be borne in mind that these 
are not a part of the Mosaic code — not laws of divine appoint- 
ment—but the interpretation and application of the Mosaic code 
by the teachers of the Jewish nation, after the captivity. But 
while they exhibit traces of human imperfection, they also show 
the benign influence of the legislation of Moses The history of 
the ancient world can not show another code of slavery so hu- 
mane as this. 

" Extract from HiVtoth Aabadim. 

"Laws rclalir.s to slaves, from the • ShoolJcan Anrooh^ 'Digest of Eab' 
binical Law. V<l!. iii. T.r>-li nrang: ' Teacher of Knowle.lse, sec. 26T. 

" 1. It is a positive commandment (Gen. 17: 13) that the owner of slaves 
is botmd to have them circumcised. If he neglects this duty, the Beth-din 



48 APPENDIX A. 

(magistrates) must perform it. This applies equally to those born lu bis 
household and those bought. The first named to be circumcised on the 
eighth day after birth, the others on the day of purchase. 

" 2. If an adulr, slave be purchased from an idolater, the question must 
be put to him, 'Art thou willing to become an Israelitish bondman or not?' 
If he consents, he is to be instructed lilie any other proselyte, and bathed as 
such. % 

" 3. If the adult slave purchased from an idolater refuses to become an 
Israelitish bondman he is not to be compelled. The buyer may retain him 
twelve months, but not longer, and must before the expiration of that period 
sell him to a Gentile. Sucli is also the law in countries where Jews are not 
permitted to make converts. The buyer of a slave may, however, at the 
lime of purchase, declare to him his intention not to circumcise him, in 
which case he may retain the heathen slave as long as he pleases. Children 
are to be bathed by order of the magistrate. If a converted slave be 
manumitted he must again be bathed a< a freeman. The master does not 
acquire a durable right over the body of his heathen slave until he has 
bathed him for servil^ude. If the slave takes advantage of his master, and 
bathes first (of his own accord.) declaring himself a free convert, he becomes 
free but remains debtor to his purchaser, and must refund the amount paid 
for him gradually as he earns the means. If the magistrates or any private 
individual cause "the slave to bathe and declare himself free, they must re- 
fund the purchase-money to the buyer. But, if an individual has, by mere 
ad\ice, induced the slave to do so, the adviser is free from responsibility. 

" 12. He who circumcises slaves pronounces the benediction, ' Blessed be 
thou, Lord our God, King of the Universe, who hast sanctified us to cir- 
cumcise bondmen.' Where the slave is an adult, the operator must cover 
his nakedness before he pronounces the benediction. 

"17. The slave who has been bathed and circumcised becomes an Israel- 
ite, and is held to the same performance of his religious duties as women 
and children are. Such a slave may be held to extreme hard work ; but, 
though the law permits it, piety and reason direct that the master should be 
kind to his slave, and not let his yoke weigh too heavy on him. He must 
find him in sullicient meat and drink, and must not abuse him cither by 
word or deed, nor rebuke him with rage, but must speak to him mildly, and 
must give him time to offer his defense, (in case of culpability.) 

" 22. Whatever the slave earns or acquires or has given to him. belongs to 
the owner. Even when the gift was made with the express stipulation that 
it should be exempt from the control of the owner. The only exception is 
where the gift is made with the express stipulation ' to recover thy freedom,' 
in which case the owner may refuse the prolfcred ransom, but it does not 
become his property imless he sets free the slave. 

"26. The slave recovers his freedom either by payment of the sum at 
which his owner rates him, or by the owners maiming him in either of the 
twenty-four principal members, (ten fingers, ten toes, two ears, and the two 
nipples of a woman,) the eyes and the teeth, or by the owner's giving him his 
freedom. 

"44. A letter of manumission must either be handed to the slave before 
competent witness.^s, or the signature of the owner must be attested by com- 
petent witnesses. If the owner manumits the slave, but dies before he has 
si"ned the letter of manumission, the heir is compelled to sign it If a slave 
who has been carried away bv heathens, or who runs away, is absent so long 
that the owner lias given up the- hope of recovering him, he can not in case 
of his coming back, be again held to servitude, but the magistrates compel 
the owner to grant the Hlave a Kater of mauuinis.si.in. 

"69. The ollsi.ring of a heathen slave, by her Hebrew master, remains n 
slave; but the offspring of a converted slave, by he' miuster. Is free. It is 
held, however, that though ho bo, to all intents and purposes, Irco, he can not 
marry a free-born woman until he ha? obtained a letter of manumission. 



APPENDIX A. 49 

"70. A slave whom his owner has united in wedlock with a free-born 
•woman, or one on whose head the owner has placed phylacteries, or who, by 
order of his owner and in his presence, has read three verses of the law be- 
lore the congregation, or who, by order of his master, has performed any re- 
ligious duty incumbent only on free men, becomes free. The magistrates 
are to compel the owner to grant him a l^trer of manumission. 

" 74. In order to be valid the manumission must be attested in writing ; n 
verbal declaration is of no validity, except In the case of a man on hi* de ith- 
bed, whose declaration that he has granted or doth grant freedom to his slave 
is sufficient; should the owner die before the letter of manumission can be 
prepared, the magistrates compel the heirs lo grant it 

" 77. If an owner on his death-bed directs, ' Let my bondwoman N. N. 
henceforth be exempt from work,' she remains a slave, but the heirs can not 
force her to labor. If the direction was, ' Let her be well treated,' the heirs 
can only compel her to do such work as is agreeable to her. In neither Ciise 
can they sell her. An owner who, on his sick-bed, bequeathes his property 
to his slave, but subsequently recovers, retains his property, but must grant 
freedom to his slave, because he has already become considered as a free 
tnan. 

" 81. A converted slave who is sold to an idolater or proselyte of the gate, 
(one who has not entered into the covenant of circumcision,) becomes free, so 
that, if he runs away from his purchaser, his former Hebrew owner has no 
claim on him. Should he not escape, the Hebrew owner is compelled by the 
magistrate to redeem him, provided the ransom to be paid does not exceed 
ten times the amount of the sum the slave was sold for, and the owner must 
then grant him a letter of manumission, so that he can marry a free-born 
■woman. Some hold that when a converted slave has been mortgaged to an 
idolater, he may with impunity take so much of his Hebrew owner's effects 
as will free him from heathen bondage." 



2%e following jparagraplis are from the Mishna; — Treatise Gittin, 
Chap. 3, sec. 6. 

•' 82. A converted slave who is sold to a master residing out of the land of 
Judea, either in Syria or Ptolemais, or any other foreign place, recovers his 
freedom, and the buyer is compelled by the magistrate to grant him a 
letter of manumission. Even though the buyer plead, 'I only require his 
Berviees within the land of Israel,' his plea is not to be received. 

"84. The owner of a converted slave in Judea, can not carry him out of 
the land without his consent, though he may sell him to another Hebrew. 
A converted slave, the property of a Hebrew, residing in a foreign country, 
who escapes into Judea, is not to be given up to his owner. Such a slave 
recovers his freedom, but remains a debtor to his former owner for the 
amount at which he is rated. If the owner residing abroad refuses his con- 
sent, the magistrate grants the slave an attestation, and he is free." 

Such was the later code of slavery among the Hebrews. 
"While it retains some features of rigor, in accordance with the 
prevailing spirit of the Israelites toward the heathen, yet how 
marked is its benignity in comparison with heathen codes of 
slavery. How carefully throughout is the slave regarded as a 
person having natural and inalienable human rights to be pro- 
tected by the law — and never as a chattel to be held solely at the 
will and for the profit of the master. 

3 



50 APPENDIX B. 



APPENDIX B. 

It is evident, from Josephus,- that slaves were held in the 
family of Herod the Great. His brother Pheroras refused the 
.hand of a daughter of Herod, because he "Was enamored of a 
female slave. Female slaves in the household of Antipater were 
put to torture because they were suspected of being privy to his 
conspiracy against the crown. See Bell, Jud. B. I , chap. 30. 

After the death of Herod, " Simon, one of the palace-servants, 
presuming on the symmetry of his figure, and his full stature, 
assumed the diadem." (Jos. de Bell, Jud. B. II., chap. 4.) Ta- 
citus, however, does not speak of Simon as a slave. (L. Y. §9.) 

But these instances do not prove the continued existence of 
Slavery among the Jews in the time of Christ. The pretensions 
of Herod to Jewish lineage, were never fully conceded. His 
father was an Idumean, and his mother a woman of Arabia. He 
was a usurper in Judea, and while ho humored the Jews as far 
as possible, with a view to consolidate his power, vet his own 
tastes and customs were not Jewish. 

There are facts, however, which prove conclusively that slaves 
were occasionally hold by Hebrews in Judea, in tho time of 
Clirist. I am indebted to Dr. Raphall for the following examples. 
Tlie first is that of II' Gamaliel, the teacher of Paul (the grandfather 
of the compiler of tlie Mishna) and his slave Tubbi. The passage is 
in the Mishna; — treatise i?erac7io^/i, chap. ii. §7. ""When his 
slave Tabbi died, he (R. Gamaliel,) received visits of condolence. 
His disciples said to him: ' Hast thou not taught us. Rabbi, that 
visits of condolence are not to be received for slaves ?' Ho 
answered them : ' My slave Tabbi was not like other slaves : he 
was pious.' " Tliis expression shows that R' Gamaliel was not 
the only slaveholder tlien in Judea. 

In the Mishna, Aboth, chap. 2, §7, we find that Ilillel, tho 
ancestor of R' Gamaliel, (and appointed President of the Sanhe- 
drin by Herod the Great about 30-36, B. C. E.,) preaching 
against tho abuses of his time, says : "Increase of bondwomen 
causes increase of fornication. Increase of bondmen causes 
increase of theft." Remarks which prove not only the prone- 
ness of owners to increase tho numbers of their slaves, but 
also the depravity of character generally imputed to slaves. 

In tho Mishna tr: ATe^u^o/A, chap, iv, §5, we read: "These 
are tho kinds of work which the woman is bound to do for her 
husband. She nmst grind corn, and bake, and wash, and cook, 
ami suckle her child, make his bed, and work in wool. If sho 



APPENDIX C. 



51 



brougbthimone bondwoman, she need not grind, bake, 61' wash ; 
if two, she need not cook nor suckle her child ; if three, she 
need not work in wool nor make his bed ; if four, she may sit m 
her easy chair." In the same MsZi^a, chap, viii., §o : "Should 
aged bondmen or bondwomen fall to her (the wife) by inheritauce, 
they are to be sold to purchase land of which he (the husband) 
enjoys the usufruct. But R' Simeon ben Gamaliel saith : 'She 
can forbid the sale, hecanse they (aged slaves) are an ornament 
to her father's house.' " Dr. Raphall adds : 

"The fact that slavery existed in Judea from the return of Ezra and the 
exiles from Babylon, till the expulsion of the Jews under Hadrian, has never 
been questioned among us." 

But while these occasional allusions to slavery in the Mishna 
show that it still lingered in Judea in the time of Christ, it is 
the opinion of learned Jews that Slavery had then ceased to be 
prominent in the nation. Indeed, this is evident from the silence 
of all contemporaneous history as to Hebrew Slavery, and from 
the humiliating circumstances in which the Jews then were as 
a tributary people. They did not adopt Koman laws and usages ; 
neither could they fully carry out theh- own. These considera- 
tions, together with those urged in the text, satisfactorily explain 
the silence of Christ as to slavery. There is no proof that He 
really came in contact with it ; and so far as it existed among 
the Jews it was soon to perish with their whole pohty. 



APPENDIX C. 

I HAVE no wish to exaggerate the evils of Slavery as it exists in 
the Southern States of this Union. I know that there are many 
humane masters, who treat their own slaves with kindness, and 
who frown upon acts of cruelty. But after all, the law defines the 
system to be one of pure CHATTELissr, The slave is not a person 
but a chattel. The Russian serf can not be alienated from the 
soil on which he was born. His master may change, but the 
serf lives on in his hut with his family. But when the kind 
master of a Southern plantation becomes bankrupt or dies, the 
law looks upon his slaves as marketable property, and sells them 
to any purchaser, regardless of local and family ties. The sura 
of all the evils of slavery lies in that one fact ; — before the law 
tho slave is not a reasonable person, having inalienable human 



52 APPEN^DIX C. 

rights, but a thing held for the use of the master; and this is 
Roman Slavery as contradistinguished from Hebrew servitude. 

I do not charge upon Southern slaveholders as a class, all the 
barbarities of the Roman code. Yet everj cruelty recorded of 
that system has been perpetrated upon slaves at the South, 
either by mob violence, or by some unprincipled master or over- 
seer, who has escaped punishment through some fiction of the 
law. 

For fuller details of the Roman Slave-law, I refer the reader 
to Blair's ^^ Inquiry into the State of Slavery among the Bomajis," 
Edinburgh edition. As a means of comparison let him take 
Stroud's " Sketch of the Laws of Slavery." The " Key to Uncle 
Tom's Cabin," page 207, presents the following items: 

"Slaves shall be deemed, sold, taken, reputed and adjudged in law to be 
CHATTELS personal in the hands of their owners and possessors, and their exe- 
cutors, administrators, and assigns, to all intents, constructions, and purposes 
■whatever. — 2 Brev. Dig. 219. Prince's Dig. 446. Cobb's Dig. 971." 

'•A slave is one who is in the power of a master to whom he belongs. — Lou. 
Civil Code, art. 35. Stroud's Sketch, p. 22."' 

'\Such obedience is the consequence only of uncontrolled authority over 
the body. There is nothing else which can operate to produce the effect. 
The power of the master must be aOsolute, to render the submission of the 
slave perfect. — Jud2e lltiffin's decision in the Case of The State v. Mann. 
"Wheeler's Law of Slaver^', 246." 

" It is clear that >laves have no legal capacity to assent to any contract 
"With the consent of their master, they may marry, and their moral power 
to agree to such a contract or connection as that of marriage can not be 
doubted; but whilst in a state of slavery it can not produce any civil effect, 
because slaves are tleptivnl of aU civil risiliU." 

" A slave is one who is in the'power of a ma><ter to'whom he belongs. The 
master may sell him, di.spose of his person, his industry' an<l his labor; he 
can do notliing, possess nothing, nor acquire any thing but what must belong 
t»4iis master.— Lou. Civii Code, Article 35. Stroud, p. 22. 

" According to Judge Kuftin, a slave is ' one doomed in his own person, and 
his posterity, to live without knowledge, and without the capacity to make 
any thing his own, and to toil that another may reap the fruits.' — 2 Wheeler's 
Law of Slavery, p. 246. State v. Mann." 

'■ All the ac(|uisitiou3 of the slave in pos.session are the property of his 
ma.ster, notwithstanding the promise of his master that the slave shall have 
certiUn of them. — (Jist v. Toohey, 2 Rich. 424." 

"A slave paid money which he had earned over and above his wages, for 
the purcliase of his children, into the hands of B. and B purchased such 
children with the money. Held that the master of such slaves was entitled 
to recover the money of B. — Ibid." 



r3 



